Guo Dan Ni, Liu Yu Shu, Pan Shao Xia, Wang Peng Fei, Wang Bing, Liu Jian Zhang, Gao Wen Hui, Zhou Yong Sheng
Chin J Dent Res. 2019;22(1):21-28. doi: 10.3290/j.cjdr.a41771.
To evaluate the time efficiency and patient preference of three impression techniques by comparing immediate digital impression performed directly after implantation with regular digital impression and conventional implant impression performed 3 months after implantation.
Twenty consecutive patients with a missing single molar or premolar who received implant treatment were recruited into this prospective self-controlled clinical trial. Three different impression techniques were performed after implant surgery on all the participants: An intraoral scanning (IOS) impression performed immediately after implant placement (immediate digital impression) was compared with a regular digital impression and a classic polyether impression (conventional implant impression) performed 3 months after implant surgery. The operating time of each impression technique was recorded. Patients were asked to complete a visual analogue scale (VAS) questionnaire on their perception of the three techniques to describe their satisfaction and preference. Statistical analyses were performed with the Wilcoxon signed rank test.
The clinical time of the immediate digital impression (10.97 ± 2.1 min) was significantly shorter than that of the conventional implant impression (14.45 ± 3.0 min) (P < 0.05). The mean time of the immediate digital impression (10.97 ± 2.1 min) was statistically the same as that of the regular digital impression (10.23 ± 2.7 min) (P > 0.05). Participants' subjective evaluation indicated higher satisfaction with the immediate digital impression than with the regular digital impression and the conventional implant impression.
The immediate digital impression was more efficient than the conventional implant impression and had the same efficiency as the regular digital impression. Among the three impression techniques, the participants showed higher satisfaction with the immediate digital impression.
通过比较种植后立即进行的即时数字印模与常规数字印模以及种植后3个月进行的传统种植印模，评估三种印模技术的时间效率和患者偏好。
连续招募20例接受种植治疗的单颗磨牙或前磨牙缺失患者，纳入这项前瞻性自身对照临床试验。在所有参与者种植手术后采用三种不同的印模技术：将种植体植入后立即进行的口内扫描（IOS）印模（即时数字印模）与常规数字印模以及种植手术后3个月进行的经典聚醚印模（传统种植印模）进行比较。记录每种印模技术的操作时间。要求患者完成一份视觉模拟量表（VAS）问卷，以描述他们对这三种技术的满意度和偏好。采用Wilcoxon符号秩检验进行统计分析。
即时数字印模的临床操作时间（10.97±2.1分钟）明显短于传统种植印模（14.45±3.0分钟）（P<0.05）。即时数字印模的平均时间（10.97±2.1分钟）与常规数字印模（10.23±2.7分钟）在统计学上相同（P>0.05）。参与者的主观评价表明，对即时数字印模的满意度高于常规数字印模和传统种植印模。
即时数字印模比传统种植印模更高效，与常规数字印模效率相同。在这三种印模技术中，参与者对即时数字印模的满意度更高。
